National Republican., 1887-03-08
THE COURT RECORD.

NO l9o' george o. urler, appellant, against
John f. Wilt. This is suit brought by
witt against Gr:er for alleged infringement OF
letters patent No. 100,36S, granted to Asa q.
Reynolds May l, 1877, for an improvement In
automatic fruit dryers. The circuit court en-
tered decree In favor Of the plaintiff, award.
Ing perpetual injunction and a reference as
to profits and damages. The decree of the cir
cult court Is reversed aud the cause remanded
VIII, difections @ 70 dismiss the bill Opinion by
No. 81. Executors Of Elias speidel, deceased,
against the trustees of the Harmony Society,
cult court saffifmed. Opinion by Justice GRAY
No. 109. Richard Viterbo. appellant, against
Samuel Friedlander. Appeal from tho United
Louisiana. Viterbo, The appellant, leased
from Fredlander, for term OF five years,
sugar plantation, situated ON the bank OF the
MISSISSIPPI n ryer IN the parish Of 81 Gharies
lowing year there was au extraordinary rise of
the. river, which overfowed the plantation
Tor yaebpp ass
upon brought this snit to have the lease an.
nued. This court Is Of opinion that the plain.
decree Of the court below dismissirls z the bill
Is reversed, and the case remanded for further
pioceedings Opinion by Justice Gray.
No, li2e. me accident Insurance Company
Loretta NJ. Crandall In error to the United
States circuit court for the district OF Illinois
The Judgment OF the circuit court. in favor Of
the plaintiff was correct, and is affirmed
Opinion by Justice Gray.
No, 12!i. The Chicago, Burlington and Kan
sas CITY Railroad Company, plaintiT IN errJr
Guhey, collector. In error TO tue supreme
|, court OF Missouri. The Judgment of the su.
preme court Of Missouri is affirmed. Opinion
No i2i. William II Plummer, administrator
Of Hiram Tucker, deceased, appellant, against
sargent so y Company Appeal from ths United
| cut. This is suit to restrain the alleged In.
| fringement ofreissued letters patent granted to
tho Tucker Manufacturing Company as ms
signee of Hiram Tucker, upon an improved
process of bronzing or colorilg iron and the
| product resulting from that process. This
court holds that the method and product Of
saTgeaut u Company differs from tho method
and product described in the patent, In the
tame way that an invention made by ono
Brocksieper In 1857 does. and that the Tucker
process, therefore. cannot be construed as an
infringement without at the same time declar-
ing the process used by Brocksieper to bean
anticipation. The decree of the circuit
No. sSi. Thomas Baldwin plaintiff In error
against ]. G. Franks Unted States marshal
In error to the circuit court vf the United
States for the district ofCalifornia. Opinion
by the CHIEF ju' tlcc reversing the Judgment of
the court below. Justices Field and Harland
No SIG. Sabine Robbins, plaintiff in error,
against the taxing district of shelby county,
Tenn. In error to the supreme court OF Ten.
nessee. In long and carefully, prepared
the supreme court of Tennessee Is reversed
and the plaintiff in error is ordered to be dis.
charged, the chief Justice and justices Field
and Gray dissenting on the grounds that the
law in question is applicable to drnmmers
coming Into the Shelby county district from
othe, Parts Of Tennessee as well as to those
from other states and to relieve the latter from
taxation imposed on the former would be a
discrimination against the citizens of the state.
=, similar decision was rendered-all the jus.
tlces concurriDg-in the case of George w.
Corson, plaintiff in error, against the stats Of
Maryland. The Judgment of the court OF up.
peals OF that state is reversed aud the cause
remanded, with objections that the plaintiff in
No. liOO. The United States, plaintiff, against
Ramon Arizona: From the circuit court Of the
United States for the southern district of New
York. The question involved in the case is
the constitutionality of the law of Congress
making the forgery OF the securities Of foreign
governments a criminal oifense. This court
sustains the coDstitutionality of the law and
answers the certified questions of the court be-
low 10 the Affirmative. Opinion by Chief JUS
Nos. 6S and 2l3 Rosewell G. Rolston ct al,
trustees, and the Hannibal and st. Joseph
Railrcad Company, appellants VS.. Thomas T.
| of the ftate of Missouri. appeal aud cross
appeal from the United States circuit court of
the western district of Missouri; The decree
Of the circuit court is reversed, so far as 1t
| fixed the amount to be paid to get an assign.
ment Of the lien is concerned, and the cause
| remanded with instructions to strike out tho
| ~,
| 1888, as the amount found due, and insert in
lieu thereof $685. 3Gi6.4G and interest at the rate
of3per cent. per annum from Qctober3, 1882. In
| all other respects the decree Is affirmed each
party to pay its own costs in this court, the
| expenses Of printing the record and the fees Of
the clerk for supervision to be taxed e-half
| to each. Opinion by Chief Justice Waite, JUS
| tiee Blatchiord not participating.
The other decisions rendered were as fol-
lows: -
Supervisors City and County of San Francisco;
No. 1900. Albert s. Rosenbaum va. john A.
Bauer, treasurer &c. Orders affirmed with
Dissenting, Mr.. Justice Bradley, Mr. Justice
| Harlan, and Mr Justice Matthew'S
| No 142. Jane Heron ct al, &C., VS.. Philip
Dater and Elizabeth L, Fellows. Judgment
| Mr. Justice Matthews
No iiIs, Bradley G. sehley vs.. Pullman
palSce Car GG%,Gahpy py Judgment affirmed
No 81 The Peoples Savings Bank OF al. vs.
| Levi NJ. Bates ct al. Judgment affirmed with
costs and interest Opinion by Mr.. Justice
No, liGs Robert Gilmer. appellant, VS.. wm.
| NJ. Stone ct al. Decree affirmed with costs.
Opinion by Mr.. Justice Harlan;
No 279. Matthew Bolles ct al. VS.. The Town
| OF Brumfield. Judgment reversed with COSTS
and cause remanded Opinion by Mr.. Justice
No i3s. Lucy ". Fletcher ct al. Va. Nathan
Fuller. &C.. ct al Judgment reversed with
| costs and cause remanded with directions to
award new trial. Opinion by Mr. Justice
No. 1913. Harrison b. schuler VS.. ]. N. Israel
and the La Clede Bank. judgment affirmed
with costs and interest. Opinion by Mr.. Jus.
No. oa5. ihe La Clede Bank ct al. va Harrl-
son b. Schulcr, and No. 1917. Harrison b.
Schuler VS.. The La Clede Bank ct al. Decree
reversed and cause renfanded with directions
10 dismiss the bill costs In this court to be paid
by. schnler: Opinion by Mr. Justice Miller.
-, No 1887. The county of Carter VS.. David
! interest. Opinion by Mr.. ChiefJustico Waite.
No 1869. Iepine 9. Rice, assignee. 80, ap
pellant, vs.. the United States. No. 10li. The
appellant, ys. the United States. Appeals from
the court OF claims Judgments affirmed By n
divided court.
VS.. Caroline l.. Merchant. eyeculrix, &c, Gas,
restored TO its place on the docket
The other business transacted was as foI-
| No. 437. Samuel s. Cissell. appellant, vs..
Anthony M. Dulch ct al. Motion to dismiss
suS':isH So ISL. Leather Manufacturers National
jr. Advanced and submitted under thirty
No 1908. Henry 8. Gilson vs. the town Of
Dayton. Motion to dismiss OF affirm sub
No. u 8, James NJ. seibert, collector. &C., VS..
United states ex rel harshman. Motion to
No. GIT. The town OF Urbsna vs. George W.
Sanford. Dismissed with costs.
No. GAL Elon 4. Marsh et al, appellants, vs..
Nichols, Shepard & Co. Motion to dismiss
submitted.
No 1890. The Lake Shore and Michigan
Southern Railway COMPANY VS. soofeld. shui.
mer, and Teagle. Motion to dismiss or anirm
submitted.
No 7s2. Melville r. Bissell VS.. Adelmer D.
Plumb. Dismissed with costs per stipulation.
No. 1909. The Vicksburg. Shreveport aud Pa .
cihc Railroad Company vs. Robert N. Scott OF
al. Motion to dismiss submitted.
No. 3 loriginaD Ex parte in the matter OF
Hollon Parker, petitioner. Argued.
Adjourned until to-day at 10 O'clock.
Court in General Term-Justces Macarthur,
Hagner, and Jarnes,-Hutchinson VS.. Rlchold;
opinion by Justice James affirming judgment
below. Walker 4 Co. VS.. Rchold; judgmen;
below affirmed; United States ex rel. White